<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2016 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Learning Journal',
	'<{subtitle}>' => 'POLS 1503: Globalization',
	'<{copyright year}>' => '2016',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<section id="Unit1">
	<h2>Unit 1</h2>
	<p>
		Greetings!
		My preferred name is Yst, though the government and employers tend to call me Richard Palmer.
		Originally, I was from California, though I&apos;ve lived in western Oregon for most of my life.
		I much prefer the climate here, as well as the high amount of green plant life.
		Like the plants, I tend to wilt when exposed to too much heat and too little water, so California really wasn&apos;t a good fit for someone such as myself.
		I&apos;m not currently employed.
		Due to a move from another section of the state, I had to quit my job, and due to an upcoming move again, I can&apos;t quite begin searching for a new job (I don&apos;t currently know for sure what city I&apos;m going to end up in).
		My passions include free software (free as in freedom, not gratis), free culture (again, I don&apos;t mean gratis), programming, and managing my own network services, such as my private cloud used for contact and calendar syncing with my mobile.
		I love music, and will listen to just about anything, provided that it&apos;s covered by a CC BY (Creative Commons Attribution) or CC BY-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike) license.
		I run a Debian server (currently down because of the pending move) and a Debian laptop, on which I&apos;m taking these courses.
		Additionally, I&apos;m in the process of learning a new language, Esperanto.
		I&apos;m very enthusiastic about privacy, and refuse to visit any network service that maliciously discriminates against my proxy network of choice, Tor, even by using an alternate privacy network.
		I prefer to use PGP-encrypted email, but will write/respond in cleartext when talking to people that don&apos;t have a PGP key pair.
		When I have time, which hasn&apos;t been often lately, I also like to learn about the structure and use of URIs.
		I have a strange fascination with them, and keep public notes on anything I find that seems interesting &lt;https://y.st./en/URI_research/&gt;.
		I also try to keep a daily journal &lt;https://y.st./en/weblog/&gt; to improve my writing skills, though I admit that I&apos;m currently twenty days behind due to being busy with life.
		Today will be day number 547 though, and I was bound to run into times in life when there wasn&apos;t enough time to write eventually.
	</p>
	<p>
		In this course, I hope to learn more about the effects of globalization and better prepare myself for the world and its future.
		The world is getting smaller, but separate cultures still exist.
		It&apos;s important to understand how these cultures interlock to form the whole.
		At the university in general, I hope to gain more skill in computer science.
		Of particular interest to me are programming, potentially mostly for my private use, and networking, which will be a more likely career choice for me.
	</p>
	<p>
		Definitions:
	</p>
	<p>
		jeremiads (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/debates.html&gt;):
		Jeremiads are speeches or long poems lamenting the current state of society and predicting its downfall.
	</p>
	<p>
		mores (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/debates.html&gt;):
		Mores are widely-observed social norms that have a deeper moral significance than others.
	</p>
	<p>
		hegemonic (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories01.html&gt;):
		If something is hegemonic, it has to do with predominance or control of one government state over another.
	</p>
	<p>
		Christendom (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories02.html&gt;):
		Medieval Christendom, which was mentioned in the article, refers to a point in time when the Christian church was a global power comparable to the pagans and the Islamic church.
	</p>
	<p>
		polity (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories02.html&gt;):
		A polity is a political entity.
	</p>
	<p>
		exogenous (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories02.html&gt;):
		If something is exogenous, it comes from elsewhere or outside.
	</p>
	<p>
		exemplars (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories02.html&gt;):
		An exemplar is something to be looked up to and emulated.
		It seems to be similar to the phase &quot;role model&quot;, though can apply to more than just people and other animals.
	</p>
	<p>
		germinal (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories03.html&gt;):
		If something is germinal, it is in its earliest stages of development.
		I kind have should have guessed that one, seeing as it has the same root as the word &quot;germinate&quot;.
	</p>
	<p>
		Realpolitik (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories03.html&gt;):
		Realpolitik refers to diplomacy that favors practicality over ideals and ethics.
	</p>
	<p>
		Glocalization (from &lt;http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/theories03.html&gt;):
		Glocalization is the act of adapting one&apos;s products to meet the specific cultural needs of the market that they will be sold in.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="Unit2">
	<h2>Unit 2</h2>
	<p>
		It&apos;s hard to directly tackle the topic of if the World Bank&apos;s practices are necessary for accountability purposes, as the World bank isn&apos;t actually holding countries accountable for their actions like they should.
		*Someone* certainly should be there to keep everyone accountable for their actions, but the World Bank has proven that they are unwilling to commit to that job.
		The World Bank has proven themselves to be bad for the people most in need and bad for the environment (The LEVIN Institute, n.d.).
		Likewise, the Wold Bank demands legal immunity for their actions (Bangladesh Working Group on International Financial Institutions and Trade Organizations, 2004).
		If the World Bank were truly a force for good, they wouldn&apos;t have anything to worry about being immune from.
		This is simply a way to get out of having to deal with the consequences of their own actions.
	</p>
	<p>
		Likewise, the International Monetary Fund isn&apos;t really living up to what it should be either.
		Together with the World Bank and the World Trade organization, the International Monetary Fund is broadening the wealth gap (Bovard, 1987), making sure that the wealthy become even more so and the impoverished stay poor.
		The United States is the only country that holds veto power over the International Monetary Fund&apos;s and the World Bank&apos;s decisions (Bangladesh Working Group on International Financial Institutions and Trade Organizations, 2004), which doesn&apos;t work out very well.
		It would be bad enough for any one country to have so much power over such a group that has the power to impact the world so much, but if I were to choose one country to hold this power, it certainly wouldn&apos;t be a country with a corrupt government such as the United States.
	</p>
	<p>
		In addition to the these organizations being corrupt and harmful to massive amounts of individuals and the environment, they can be a threat to a nation&apos;s sovereignty.
		While the World bank demands legal immunity for their actions, this immunity does not go both ways.
		Instead, the borrowing country is required to sign a waiver allowing the World Bank (and other lenders) to sue them!
		These suits can result in the seizure of any asset within the borrowing country&apos;s borders (Bangladesh Working Group on International Financial Institutions and Trade Organizations, 2004).
		Effectively, this puts the borrowing country at the mercy of the World Bank and the World Bank&apos;s associates.
		This ensures that the World Bank and its related organizations aren&apos;t held accountable at all!
		As there are two sides to every deal, and accountability goes both ways, this proves that the World Bank&apos;s practices are *counterproductive* to accountability, and thus, cannot be required for accountability purposes.
	</p>
	<p>
		These global financial institutions don&apos;t use this power for good, either.
		They have been known to plunge whole countries into poverty (The LEVIN Institute, n.d.).
		Likewise, the borrowing country is required to purchase foreign goods and services from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States (collectively known as the G7), even when more competitive options are available within their own borders (Bangladesh Working Group on International Financial Institutions and Trade Organizations, 2004).
		It&apos;s arguable that this is a guaranteed loss in sovereignty, as the borrowing country no longer has control of its own economy.
	</p>
	<p>
		References:</p>
	<p>
		Bangladesh Working Group on International Financial Institutions and Trade Organizations.
		(2004, September 4).
		The World Bank and the Question of Immunity.
		Retrieved from https://unnayan.org./~unnayano/Other/IFI_Watch_Bangladesh_Vol_1%20No_1.pdf</p>
	<p>
		Bovard, J.
		(1987, September 28).
		The World Bank Vs.
		the World Poor.
		Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa092.html</p>
	<p>
		The LEVIN Institute.
		(n.d.).
		International Monetary Fund and World Bank.
		Retrieved from http://globalization101.org./uploads/File/IMF/imfall.pdf</p>
</section>
<section id="Unit4">
	<h2>Unit 4</h2>
	<p>
		Folksonomy:
		Folksonomy is a system in which users can classify information by tagging it.
		Any peice of information, such as a weblog post or a photograph, could be in several classes, so any number of tags may be used.
	</p>
	<p>
		Syndication:
		Syndication is a way for one entity to make content available for another entity to use.
		In the context of the Web, syndication is typically accomplished using RSS, JSON, or the like.
	</p>
	<p>
		Proliferation:
		Proliferation is an increase in number.
	</p>
	<p>
		Last week&apos;s assigned reading materials called the peer production and open source development models technological innovations that have greatly aided in globalization.
		While I&apos;ve never thought of development models as technological constructs before, these two, which both overlap and go hand-in-hand, have certainly made a huge impact on globalization as we know it.
		The main globalization-enhancing quality of these paired development models is that communities in any part of the world can participate.
		This powerful attribute causes several other powerful attributes to take shape.
		Peer production and open source software are truly made powerful by the Internet, which is the largest and most globalized information-distribution system in the world.
	</p>
	<p>
		When global communities are welcomed by the software developers, it can result in community-led localization of the software.
		For example, software that is written in English might not be very usable to people that speak and read Japanese instead.
		However, as some Japanese people speak both languages, they often volunteer their time to translate the software&apos;s interface, resulting in the next version of the software being usable in either English or Japanese (Lyman, 2008).
		The Debian project has seem much success on that front, and can be used in any of 315 languages (Debian, 2016)!
		Several of these are variants of one another.
		For example, Brittish English, Canadian English, and United States English are all offered, as well as some joke languages, such as English Pig Latin.
		However, there is still an impressive number of real and unique languages available to choose from.
		Without a global community, this would never have happened, but likewise, without the open source peer production development model that the Debian project employs, the project wouldn&apos;t have this global community.
	</p>
	<p>
		Another globalization-pushing aspect to software developed in this manner is that the main developing organization isn&apos;t limiting use of the software to users in what &quot;viable markets&quot;.
		Anyone anywhere on the globe, assuming that they have Internet access, can access and use the software.
		United States-based vendors in particular have a tendency to ignore foreign markets (Lyman, 2008).
		Likewise, the concerns of people living withing &quot;viable markets&quot; aren&apos;t the only ones that can make their needs known.
		Users anywhere can submit bug reports, and they can even submit code patches if they want.
		Open source software also promotes trust even across national boarders, unlike proprietary software (Lyman, 2008), likely because without source code availability, one can never know what their software is actually doing and cannot very well trust it.
	</p>
	<p>
		These development models also lower the costs of doing business by pulling in help from users around the world.
		Companies have long contracted out work to other companies, improving efficiency and lowering costs by allowing each company to specialize and become good at a particular thing.
		When your users are contributing to your code though, and you aren&apos;t even paying them to do that, your business costs plummet even further (The Levin Institute, n.d.).
		Contracting out the work to other companies within the same country just isn&apos;t as viable of an option as it once was.
		The open source and peer production models are pushing globalization ever onward.
	</p>
	<p>
		The only potential negative impact that I can see to these new development models are to those that try to fight this new way of doing things.
		Those that cannot embrace new business models will eventually be left in the dust.
		For now, holding onto the methods of the past and attempting to keep all of your source code in-house is working for many large corperations, but they are only able to do so because their competition is doing the same.
		As companies continue transitioning to a more globalized approach, companies that fail to do so will begin to go out of business.
		If this is to be avoided, all (or at least most) companies will need to leave behind their hesitation and join in the open source revolution.
		What currently is profitable won&apos;t always be, and will eventually be the downfall of many businesses.
	</p>
	<p>
		References:</p>
	<p>
		Debian.
		(2016, September 29).
		Debian -- PO files in Debian for each language.
		Retrieved from https://www.debian.org./international/l10n/po/</p>
	<p>
		The Levin Institute.
		(n.d.).
		Microsoft Word - tech2011 - glob101techandglob.pdf.
		Retrieved from http://my.uopeople.edu/pluginfile.php/126112/mod_book/chapter/94453/glob101techandglob.pdf</p>
	<p>
		Lyman, J.
		(2008, December 12).
		Open source – the ultimate globalization tool — 451 CAOS Theory.
		Retrieved from https://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2008/12/12/open-source-the-ultimate-globalization-tool/</p>
</section>
<section id="Unit8">
	<h2>Unit 8</h2>
	<p>
		Corporate greed has always been a problem.
		Rich and powerful people often have no problem abusing the less fortunate for their own personal gain.
		Before globalization though, this problem was mostly contained.
		Wealthy and powerful people could be found in many parts of the world, and they caused problems for the less fortunate within their respective ranges of influence, but they could only do so much harm and they could only grow their power to a limited extent.
	</p>
	<p>
		For the most part, globalization doesn&apos;t cause new problems.
		Instead, it exacerbates existing problems to a global scale.
		Corporate greed is one such problem.
	</p>
	<p>
		Corporations are now exerting their destructive forces on the furthest reaches of the planet.
		Instead of driving local populations into relative poverty, they&apos;re now able to plunge entire countries into even deeper poverty.
		They spread the adoption of laws that favor corporations over individuals, such as copyright and patent laws, poor labor regulation laws, and poor health standards laws.
		The damage doesn&apos;t end there, either.
		These large, uncaring corporations gain so much power that they decimate their smaller competition.
		Local businesses and businesses that aren&apos;t using cutthroat business models have a tendency to die out because they can&apos;t compete with globalized businesses.
		As a result, we lose our ability, as customers, to vote with our respective currencies for better and more human-friendly business models.
		Something must be done about this.
	</p>
	<p>
		Ending globalization is clearly the wrong way to solve this problem though.
		Too much good comes from trade with other nations, as each nation has different resources and capabilities to bring to the table.
		Likewise, shared knowledge is knowledge that does more good, as it helps the original knowledge-holders and those that the knowledge was shared with.
		This can even create a feedback loop where two or more parties continue to improve upon an idea, one party improving the idea in some aspect, then another party taking the improved version and improving on it again, and so on.
	</p>
	<p>
		We can and must limit the negative impact of greedy corporations without preventing international communication and trade.
		For one thing, we need international labor laws that prevent the exploitation of workers.
		Labor regulations shouldn&apos;t be evadable simply by moving production to an underdeveloped country that hasn&apos;t had the time and resources needed to set up necessary frameworks for protecting their citizens.
		Furthermore, we need to put a stop to tax loopholes exploited by wealthy corporations to pad their bottom lines at the expense of society.
		What if large corporations made a bit less money?
		And what if their efforts helped fund vitally-needed public utilities such as a public health care system?
		It might not matter as much that the less-than-wealthy don&apos;t have as much money as the corporations if their basic human needs are met without cutting into the money that they do have.
		Instead of allowing our governments to remain a tool for the corporations to use against the citizens, we need to insist that governments become entities that protect and assist private citizens.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
